mk/spdk.unittest.mk already includes mk/spdk.common.mk, so it's
not needed. This also fixes an issue where touching an included
.mk file would not trigger unit tests to rebuild if they had
this duplicated mk/spdk.common.mk include.
Signed-off-by: Jim Harris <james.r.harris@intel.com>
Change-Id: I41a04eb77ce468849cb9b53bd1f76df6fec06e46
Reviewed-on: https://review.gerrithub.io/c/443980
Tested-by: SPDK CI Jenkins <sys_sgci@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Shuhei Matsumoto <shuhei.matsumoto.xt@hitachi.com>
Reviewed-by: Changpeng Liu <changpeng.liu@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Darek Stojaczyk <dariusz.stojaczyk@intel.com>
spdk.unittest.mk includes spdk.app.mk, but some unit test
Makefiles include both spdk.unittest.mk and spdk.app.mk,
meaning spdk.app.mk gets included twice. Fix that.
This hasn't been an issue because spdk.app.mk currently
only includes variables - but no rules.
Signed-off-by: Jim Harris <james.r.harris@intel.com>
Change-Id: I23d39e8084f79442fb06ae9b5a6a68d6134adff4
Reviewed-on: https://review.gerrithub.io/434281
Tested-by: SPDK CI Jenkins <sys_sgci@intel.com>
Chandler-Test-Pool: SPDK Automated Test System <sys_sgsw@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Shuhei Matsumoto <shuhei.matsumoto.xt@hitachi.com>
Reviewed-by: Ben Walker <benjamin.walker@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Jim Harris <james.r.harris@intel.com>
Change-Id: I06d33ff7f6df0724768f5a23236485c26e0568f4
Reviewed-on: https://review.gerrithub.io/399729
Tested-by: SPDK Automated Test System <sys_sgsw@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Daniel Verkamp <daniel.verkamp@intel.com>
From the exising code, the comparison should + 1.
Suppose offset = 2^19, we still can be fit into
tree with level =0, since there will be 64 buffer,
each with size 2^18, so we do not need to
increse the tree level.
Also a unit test is added to demonstrate this.
Change-Id: I95d3542b0881aa7bb661bc57bc789cc4ef4e7509
Signed-off-by: Ziye Yang <optimistyzy@gmail.com>
Reviewed-on: https://review.gerrithub.io/372396
Tested-by: SPDK Automated Test System <sys_sgsw@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Jim Harris <james.r.harris@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Daniel Verkamp <daniel.verkamp@intel.com>
